Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's a matter of discernment, oh young obiwan. I took Taz's question exactly at face value. This is why I'm a Statistikhengst, whilst you run around at a cartoon-tempo and say "meep-meep".I have come to expect more from you re: clarity and precision.I am well aware of that. Taz asked a question. I answered. Chill out.Come on you two, he was convicted in FEDERAL court, and faces a FEDERAL death penalty.When was the last time Massachusetts actually executed a prisoner?
Quite a while.
You could have asked, when was the last time the Feds executed a Muslim, you know, like Hassan Akbar.
Get your A game on here dudes.
Jeez!
Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
My bad for getting spoiled.
Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
That is what I am asking for, does anyone have a public source of this video the Feds claim to have? This video has yet to have been shown to the public. Gov. Deval Patrick said police had it, and he had been briefed on it, but had not seen it himself.Do you have a source for that?When are we going to see the video of him dropping the backpack bomb into the trashcan like the authorities claimed he did?
I get it a politician said someone told him something about something that he believes existed because he was told by a third party what it was and that it was under lock and key.That is what I am asking for, does anyone have a public source of this video the Feds claim to have? This video has yet to have been shown to the public. Gov. Deval Patrick said police had it, and he had been briefed on it, but had not seen it himself.Do you have a source for that?When are we going to see the video of him dropping the backpack bomb into the trashcan like the authorities claimed he did?
Deval Patrick Boston Marathon Bombing Motive Still Unknown
He didn't hear it from a "third party", he said the police had it and he was briefed on it, though he hadn't seen it.I get it a politician said someone told him something about something that he believes existed because he was told by a third party what it was and that it was under lock and key.That is what I am asking for, does anyone have a public source of this video the Feds claim to have? This video has yet to have been shown to the public. Gov. Deval Patrick said police had it, and he had been briefed on it, but had not seen it himself.Do you have a source for that?When are we going to see the video of him dropping the backpack bomb into the trashcan like the authorities claimed he did?
Deval Patrick Boston Marathon Bombing Motive Still Unknown
If it exists then we may see it, if it does not exist then it was not needed at trial.
Apparently, the "pic or it did not happen" standard found on message boards does not apply to a criminal trial.
He didn't hear it from a "third party", he said the police had it and he was briefed on it, though he hadn't seen it.I get it a politician said someone told him something about something that he believes existed because he was told by a third party what it was and that it was under lock and key.That is what I am asking for, does anyone have a public source of this video the Feds claim to have? This video has yet to have been shown to the public. Gov. Deval Patrick said police had it, and he had been briefed on it, but had not seen it himself.Do you have a source for that?When are we going to see the video of him dropping the backpack bomb into the trashcan like the authorities claimed he did?
Deval Patrick Boston Marathon Bombing Motive Still Unknown
If it exists then we may see it, if it does not exist then it was not needed at trial.
Apparently, the "pic or it did not happen" standard found on message boards does not apply to a criminal trial.
Why would Deval Patrick lie about what the Feds told him? Or are the Feds lying to him?
The simplest explanation here is they have the video, and if it confirmed the prosecution's case, they would have released it by now. But they haven't, so the question is why.
Now you are really stretching things to explain this away this video. The common sense explanation is the most likely one. He has no reason to lie, and if he was mistaken, he would no reason to clarify or revise his remarks for the sake of the investigation once he found out that wasn't the case. Also, if Gov. Patrick was mistaken or lying, the Feds would have clarified the matter on their own for the sake of their own investigation.He didn't hear it from a "third party", he said the police had it and he was briefed on it, though he hadn't seen it.I get it a politician said someone told him something about something that he believes existed because he was told by a third party what it was and that it was under lock and key.That is what I am asking for, does anyone have a public source of this video the Feds claim to have? This video has yet to have been shown to the public. Gov. Deval Patrick said police had it, and he had been briefed on it, but had not seen it himself.Do you have a source for that?When are we going to see the video of him dropping the backpack bomb into the trashcan like the authorities claimed he did?
Deval Patrick Boston Marathon Bombing Motive Still Unknown
If it exists then we may see it, if it does not exist then it was not needed at trial.
Apparently, the "pic or it did not happen" standard found on message boards does not apply to a criminal trial.
Why would Deval Patrick lie about what the Feds told him? Or are the Feds lying to him?
The simplest explanation here is they have the video, and if it confirmed the prosecution's case, they would have released it by now. But they haven't, so the question is why.
If Patrick is incorrect that does not mean he is lying it could be a number of things, including he was misinformed. In any event he should not have opened his mouth without first hand knowledge.
How very Christian of you both.Vegas would be making odds on how many times he kicked the air.Public execution on the finish line. Tickets to see it.................all proceeds go to those injured and to the families of those that died....................
Charity event as we he swings.
Steinlight and his crime fighting side kick are going to get to the bottom of this!Why would Deval Patrick lie about what the Feds told him? Or are the Feds lying to him?
The simplest explanation here is they have the video, and if it confirmed the prosecution's case, they would have released it by now. But they haven't, so the question is why.
I am stretching nothing, I am laying out the facts as you presented.Now you are really stretching things to explain this away this video. The common sense explanation is the most likely one. He has no reason to lie, and if he was mistaken, he would no reason to clarify or revise his remarks for the sake of the investigation once he found out that wasn't the case. Also, if Gov. Patrick was mistaken or lying, the Feds would have clarified the matter on their own for the sake of their own investigation.He didn't hear it from a "third party", he said the police had it and he was briefed on it, though he hadn't seen it.I get it a politician said someone told him something about something that he believes existed because he was told by a third party what it was and that it was under lock and key.That is what I am asking for, does anyone have a public source of this video the Feds claim to have? This video has yet to have been shown to the public. Gov. Deval Patrick said police had it, and he had been briefed on it, but had not seen it himself.Do you have a source for that?
Deval Patrick Boston Marathon Bombing Motive Still Unknown
If it exists then we may see it, if it does not exist then it was not needed at trial.
Apparently, the "pic or it did not happen" standard found on message boards does not apply to a criminal trial.
Why would Deval Patrick lie about what the Feds told him? Or are the Feds lying to him?
The simplest explanation here is they have the video, and if it confirmed the prosecution's case, they would have released it by now. But they haven't, so the question is why.
If Patrick is incorrect that does not mean he is lying it could be a number of things, including he was misinformed. In any event he should not have opened his mouth without first hand knowledge.
Discussing a feeling or perspective is actually "christian" it is not like we are bombing innocent people because we are terrorists.How very Christian of you both.Vegas would be making odds on how many times he kicked the air.Public execution on the finish line. Tickets to see it.................all proceeds go to those injured and to the families of those that died....................
Charity event as we he swings.
You haven't explained anything away. And the question around this video remains.I am stretching nothing, I am laying out the facts as you presented.Now you are really stretching things to explain this away this video. The common sense explanation is the most likely one. He has no reason to lie, and if he was mistaken, he would no reason to clarify or revise his remarks for the sake of the investigation once he found out that wasn't the case. Also, if Gov. Patrick was mistaken or lying, the Feds would have clarified the matter on their own for the sake of their own investigation.He didn't hear it from a "third party", he said the police had it and he was briefed on it, though he hadn't seen it.I get it a politician said someone told him something about something that he believes existed because he was told by a third party what it was and that it was under lock and key.That is what I am asking for, does anyone have a public source of this video the Feds claim to have? This video has yet to have been shown to the public. Gov. Deval Patrick said police had it, and he had been briefed on it, but had not seen it himself.
Deval Patrick Boston Marathon Bombing Motive Still Unknown
If it exists then we may see it, if it does not exist then it was not needed at trial.
Apparently, the "pic or it did not happen" standard found on message boards does not apply to a criminal trial.
Why would Deval Patrick lie about what the Feds told him? Or are the Feds lying to him?
The simplest explanation here is they have the video, and if it confirmed the prosecution's case, they would have released it by now. But they haven't, so the question is why.
If Patrick is incorrect that does not mean he is lying it could be a number of things, including he was misinformed. In any event he should not have opened his mouth without first hand knowledge.
Fuck off you stupid faggot.Steinlight and his crime fighting side kick are going to get to the bottom of this!Why would Deval Patrick lie about what the Feds told him? Or are the Feds lying to him?
The simplest explanation here is they have the video, and if it confirmed the prosecution's case, they would have released it by now. But they haven't, so the question is why.
For you. I am satisfied there was enough evidence to convict him.You haven't explained anything away. And the question around this video remains.I am stretching nothing, I am laying out the facts as you presented.Now you are really stretching things to explain this away this video. The common sense explanation is the most likely one. He has no reason to lie, and if he was mistaken, he would no reason to clarify or revise his remarks for the sake of the investigation once he found out that wasn't the case. Also, if Gov. Patrick was mistaken or lying, the Feds would have clarified the matter on their own for the sake of their own investigation.He didn't hear it from a "third party", he said the police had it and he was briefed on it, though he hadn't seen it.I get it a politician said someone told him something about something that he believes existed because he was told by a third party what it was and that it was under lock and key.
If it exists then we may see it, if it does not exist then it was not needed at trial.
Apparently, the "pic or it did not happen" standard found on message boards does not apply to a criminal trial.
Why would Deval Patrick lie about what the Feds told him? Or are the Feds lying to him?
The simplest explanation here is they have the video, and if it confirmed the prosecution's case, they would have released it by now. But they haven't, so the question is why.
If Patrick is incorrect that does not mean he is lying it could be a number of things, including he was misinformed. In any event he should not have opened his mouth without first hand knowledge.
Most people are or don't care or know about this trial at all, so you aren't alone. A minority of us are interested in this missing tape, and the issue has yet to be addressed.For you. I am satisfied there was enough evidence to convict him.You haven't explained anything away. And the question around this video remains.I am stretching nothing, I am laying out the facts as you presented.Now you are really stretching things to explain this away this video. The common sense explanation is the most likely one. He has no reason to lie, and if he was mistaken, he would no reason to clarify or revise his remarks for the sake of the investigation once he found out that wasn't the case. Also, if Gov. Patrick was mistaken or lying, the Feds would have clarified the matter on their own for the sake of their own investigation.He didn't hear it from a "third party", he said the police had it and he was briefed on it, though he hadn't seen it.
Why would Deval Patrick lie about what the Feds told him? Or are the Feds lying to him?
The simplest explanation here is they have the video, and if it confirmed the prosecution's case, they would have released it by now. But they haven't, so the question is why.
If Patrick is incorrect that does not mean he is lying it could be a number of things, including he was misinformed. In any event he should not have opened his mouth without first hand knowledge.
